Highlights

 
Quotable
Right is right, even if everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it.
William Penn
Original Blog US Casualties Contact Donate

 
October 22, 2005

Stifling Neo-Crazy Media Sycophants


by Gordon Prather

Judith Miller has just spent 85 days in prison for refusing to tell Special Prosecutor Fitzgerald what her neo-crazy "handlers" in the Bush-Cheney administration told her to do next, following her service as their "embedded" media sycophant in Iraq.

That jail-time ought to give pause to the gang of "domestic" neo-crazy media sycophants that have been feeding you neo-crazy lies and misleading statements for years.

And perhaps more importantly, withholding from you the truth.

But what to do about the "foreign" neo-crazy media sycophants – especially those "covering" the International Atomic Energy Agency in Vienna – who are still feeding you lies and withholding the truth from you on the eve of what may prove to be an even greater strategic disaster than Bush's preemptive invasion of Iraq?

In a Note Verbale of August 1, 2005, Iran informed all IAEA members that Iran had decided to resume uranium-conversion activities – voluntarily suspended almost two years before – at the Uranium Conversion Facility at Esfahan.

In October 2003, Iran had entered into negotiations with France, Germany and the United Kingdom – who claimed to be negotiating on behalf of the European Union – with the explicit expectation of obtaining "transparent cooperative access" to European nuclear technology.

As a "confidence building measure," Iran voluntarily signed and voluntarily began to adhere to an Additional Protocol to its IAEA Safeguards Agreement, pending its ratification by the Iranian parliament.

Iran also extended its voluntary suspension of all uranium-enrichment related activities taken a year previously to include uranium-conversion activities. Since all those activities were already subject to Iran's Safeguards Agreement, Iran invited the IAEA to monitor the suspensions.

It is important for you to know that the IAEA was never a party to the Iran-EU negotiations. That the IAEA Board of Governors never "had a dog in that fight." That it is not – and never was – any of the IAEA Board's business whether Iran suspended or resumed uranium-conversion activities, so long as those activities continued to be subject to IAEA Safeguards.

Furthermore, it is important for you to know that the Iranian Safeguards Agreement guarantees Iran's "inalienable" right of access to any and all nuclear technologies, so long as the applications of such technology that involve "source of special nuclear materials" are made subject to IAEA Safeguards.

It is also important for you to know that IAEA Statute requires the IAEA to facilitate the international transfer of any and all nuclear technologies, ensuring "to the extent it is able" that none of them are subsequently used "in furtherance of any military purpose."

Lastly, it is important for you to know that Iran is not required to adhere to the Additional Protocol until it is ratified – if ever – by the Iranian Parliament.

But you probably didn't know any of that because the neo-crazy media sycophants at Reuters, Associated Press, United Press International and other international news agencies have withheld that important information from you.

For example, you probably didn't know that the EU-Iran Paris Agreement was merely to begin negotiations on a mutually acceptable agreement to "provide objective guarantees" to the EU that "Iran's nuclear program is exclusively for peaceful purposes."

And you certainly didn't know – because no media weenie has yet reported it to you – that on March 23, 2005, Iran offered a package of "objective guarantees" (developed by an international panel of experts) that included a voluntary "confinement" of Iran's nuclear programs, including forgoing the reprocessing of spent fuel and the production of plutonium.

So, what did Reuters' Louis Charbonneau tell you about the Iranian Note Verbale of August 1st in which the Iranians noted that the EU had never responded to their offer of March 23 and did not appear to be negotiating in good faith, thereby effectively explaining why the Iranians were breaking off negotiations with the EU?

Nothing.

According to Charbonneau;

"Tehran agreed with the European Union's biggest powers to halt all nuclear fuel work last November to ease tensions after the IAEA found Iran had hidden weapons-grade highly enriched uranium."

But now the Iranians had inexplicably gone out and "broke UN seals at a uranium processing plant." In so doing;

"Tehran defied EU warnings [that] it could now be referred to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions for having kept its uranium enrichment work secret for years – until it was found out in 2002 – breaking the nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty."

Knowing what you know, now, you might conclude Charbonneau is deliberately misleading you.

Or that he's feeding you another pack of neo-crazy lies.


comments on this article?
 
 
Archives
More Archives
Physicist James Gordon Prather has served as a policy implementing official for national security-related technical matters in the Federal Energy Agency, the Energy Research and Development Administration, the Department of Energy, the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the Department of the Army. Dr. Prather also served as legislative assistant for national security affairs to U.S. Sen. Henry Bellmon, R-Okla. -- ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee and member of the Senate Energy Committee and Appropriations Committee. Dr. Prather had earlier worked as a nuclear weapons physicist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California and Sandia National Laboratory in New Mexico.

Reproduction of material from any original Antiwar.com pages
without written permission is strictly prohibited.
Copyright 2017 Antiwar.com